pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: We are in golden age of digital photography  (Read 7913 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 14, 2014, 14:23 »
+1
We photographers, camera manufactures not much: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/what_matters.shtml


Rinderart

« Reply #1 on: March 15, 2014, 14:32 »
0
I read Michael more than anyone. great piece especially the paragraph about Getty.

« Reply #2 on: March 15, 2014, 15:13 »
+4
The trouble for the camera makers is that they are not in the photography business, they are in the electronic commodities business. That means you sell a huge volume for a short while until the next craze catches on and if you miss the wave then you're more or less out of the game.
Hopefully the camera makers will be able to adjust to the changing market and won't just go bust, so at least some DSLRs will continue to be made, even if in smaller quantities at higher prices. The trouble with the end of a boom market is that there are lots of costs for manufacturers that can't necessarily be scaled back fast enough to avoid bankruptcy.

« Reply #3 on: March 15, 2014, 15:54 »
+1
Photography-only manufacturers have slim chance to survive next 5 years. It looks like Sony and Samsung might be next leaders. Canon may have a chance to change its course and start supplying their technology to other companies. Nikon does not have much to offer.

« Reply #4 on: March 15, 2014, 16:17 »
0
I think much of this is true - how many SLR owners create images close to their capability?  I know I didn't till I got involved in Stock photography. I guess the industry might go back to volumes in the film era where camera updates were rare as I recall. I think Nikon will last quite a bit longer because of users investment in Lenses and the fact that DSLR lenses are better due to physics so there will always be a semi/pro market.

« Reply #5 on: March 15, 2014, 18:17 »
0
Years ago the personal computer was the thing on the market and the latest purchase was something for an owner to boast about. "My computer is better/faster than yours" was an oft heard mantra in the 80's and 90's. Today they have more capability than most of us know how to use or more horsepower than needed for typing a letter or Email. We knew the technology run was over when they started offering different colors of cases. Then there came a laptop, then more recently the tablet. But we don't spend much time checking the speeds and capability before dropping our money. The device has a form factor we want and has the power for the general tasks at hand. We no longer go to a custom computer store to get the speed or features we want - it's down to whatever store to get something in a cardboard box off the shelf.

I also see the camera following the same path only a few years later. I think we are reaching maturity - not sure if we are quite there yet. But I see less one-upsmanship with "my camera is better/more pixels/less noise than yours" or "I just gotta have that new model". There are still increasing buyers so the market has not saturated yet. But the buyers are not pursuing SLR's, instead point and shoots, and smart phones. The transition of form factors is well under way. Phones are "good enough" to do most peoples job of capturing a photo and advancing specifications are falling to the status of "who cares".

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #6 on: March 15, 2014, 19:20 »
+2
Photography-only manufacturers have slim chance to survive next 5 years. It looks like Sony and Samsung might be next leaders. Canon may have a chance to change its course and start supplying their technology to other companies. Nikon does not have much to offer.
Sony and Samsung are light years behind Canon and Nikon. Canon and Nikon were, are and will be leaders in the next 100 years.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #7 on: March 15, 2014, 19:26 »
-7
Nikon does not have much to offer.

oh really ?
nikon is the only brand who's got a chance to last for the next 50 yrs actually.

they make the best DSLR lenses in the market with the best AF, their bodies have the best ergonomics, they're distributed worldwide and you can find spare parts even in godforsaken places.

samsung ? sony ? sigma ? good luck with that ...

Sony recently sold its entire Vaio division and is in dire straits financially, Samsung never seemed to be serious about the DSLR market, Sigma is doing very good with lenses but forget about their bodies, they're going nowhere.

as for Canon i've never been impressed by their toy DSLR bodies apart the 1D series.
and a cheap nikon D7100 beats the 5DmkII hands down pretty much in any department especially AF.

Canon is also still lagging behind the D800 and soon we will have the D900 or D800s ... Canon is a dead man walking, Sony is the only one who's doing some serious innovations and producing in house their sensors, batteries, etc




Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #8 on: March 15, 2014, 19:33 »
-4
Canon and Nikon were, are and will be leaders in the next 100 years.

but Canon is behind Nikon, they've nothing on par with the D800 and now nikon launched the D4s too.

something is going on at Canon, they sold the 5DmkII like hotcakes for years and now they're suddenly outmarketed by Nikon and the 5DmkIII has been a fiasco.

« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2014, 01:12 »
+9
Oh Lord! A Nikonian zealot! Hobo, it's not about an insult to your favourite brand, the issue is that the entire market for DSLRs and cameras in general is shrinking fast as Joe Public hops up and down in delight over the image from his iPad and Nokia phone.  In those circumstances, the companies which are more into generalised electronics marketing, rather than being heavily reliant on a single electronics segment (high end camera technology) are best positioned to survive.

It's a bit like independents and exclusives here - the exclusives are reliant on one market and if that all goes wrong they have a problem repositioning themselves. The independents may not have done as well by being diversified but they are better insulated against shocks in a single segment of the market.  I don't know which company is more diversified into non-photo areas, though I know Canon does a lot of business machines.

So it's got nothing at all to do with the comparative merits of cameras from different makers, it's about whether or not the fashion for carrying DSLRs is dying among the general public who don't earn anything from their cameras and who form the bulk of the buyers.  We've been very lucky that these people have propped up the market for a decade, prompting the makers to invest huge sums in developing the technology (which is, as the article says, technology that most of the people who own it don't use or need). 

The problem is that if you invest, say $100 million in a production line to make 1,000 cameras an hour, and the sales volume drops to 100 cameras an hour you've got a huge issue, because you still have to service the debt you incurred building the plant.  It doesn't matter whether your name is Nikon or Canon or how good your cameras are, all that matters is what is happening to your income and what bills you are obliged to pay.  If you can't match those up then you go bust.

« Reply #10 on: March 16, 2014, 03:19 »
0
Yawn .. sales are declining / the sky is falling .. whatever. We're looking at an infographic based on vague stats covering a short time span .. all market's fluctuate. You could create another infographic displaying broader stats going back to film or even the early digital era and it would tell a completely opposite story with sales now booming (taking normal flux into consideration) .. sooooo what if the general public actually does stop buying mass quantities of cheap DSLRs? .. ummmm I guess camera manufacturers will go back to the same profit margin that kept them in business during the century prior to the "everybody thinks they're a photographer" trend.  :P

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2014, 03:53 »
0
Oh Lord! A Nikonian zealot!

Your analysis is correct but if we look at the past 10-15 yrs we've seen a lot of general-purpose manufacturers going bust ... motorola ... nokia .. blackberry .. philips .. and what about pentax, minolta, etc

Sony itself is on the way to restructure the whole company and some product lines will be killed.

the DSLR market getting smaller, i see it as a plus, there will be less happy snappers around and they better stick with phones and sony NEX in my opinion, that's where they belong.

« Reply #12 on: March 16, 2014, 04:11 »
+3
The history of photography is about the images and how they relate to the society and how the society understands what the images mean. The technology is only relevant in so much as how it affects what images are produced and how they look. It's all about the society.

Broadly, since 1839/40, fashions in photography have tended to cycle periodically between stylistic artsyness and pseudo-objective observational realism (which tends to be more about story telling and is therefore inherently subjective). Both tendencies have resulted in fantastic work. Sometimes artsyness, especially, has been a reaction to the technology.

Every age has been a golden age. There is no period since 1839/40 in which people have not been producing fantastic work. Sites like luminous landscape tend IMO to be obsessed with gadgets, composition, process etc
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 04:15 by bunhill »

Ron

« Reply #13 on: March 16, 2014, 04:38 »
+2
Philips never went bust, Blackberry is still around, Nokia is still around.

« Reply #14 on: March 16, 2014, 08:52 »
+2
Competition is fierce and a lot of tog's are probably bored with buying new stuff because these days the new stuff is only incrementally different from the old stuff and the old stuff still takes a solid pic.

Personally, reading about cameras and their capabilities bores me rigid. I prefer reading about photography and looking at photographs. I have no interest in the kit being used unless it is something quirky, like reading about Giacomo Brunelli* and finding out his unique and compelling work is captured with his Dad's old Miranda Sensomat. How much more interesting is that than discovering someone's latest crappy and derivative work was captured by the latest bells and whistles piece of kit that cost more than your car.

*http://thephotographersgallery.org.uk/giacomo-brunelli-3
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 08:58 by Red Dove »

Uncle Pete

« Reply #15 on: March 16, 2014, 08:53 »
+4
Shh you don't want the facts to interfere with a good rant, do you?  ::)

Philips never went bust, Blackberry is still around, Nokia is still around.

Sony is like 3M. Top companies in the world, they are constantly adapting and changing to meet the market demands. I expect both to stay around a long time with that kind of attitude.

I'm sure the new DSLR and other camera offerings from all the companies will be less diverse in the future. So what? The technology advances and they will still be competing for whatever portion of the market they can hold. The choice is make new products that create a need or fill one for consumers and professionals. (or go do something else)

Nikon hasn't beaten Canon at anything. They both make fine equipment and offer a wide choice of high quality products. Yes I prefer Canon, I especially like the lens selection, but I've been shooting Canon for almost 50 years. Just a bit of happiness and brand loyalty.

The article is a winner: "A high quality lens will always trump the sensor when it comes to producing superior image quality." and his point about incremental changes as some selling point for a new model, have past. And here's hoping pixel wars has been settle with no one injured? (but some people still want that rumored 42MP camera don't they?)

What kind of lens to phone cameras have? End of any argument.

Phones have taken over. Just fine with me. Less people with high quality imaging equipment = less competition. The sites that are marketing that stuff, will get just what it is and fine. That's their plan. But it's never going to be high quality studio or big broad travel landscapes. It's going to be snapshots. It's going to be social and lifestyle and very timely instant shots. Everything has it's place.

« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 10:55 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #16 on: March 16, 2014, 10:08 »
0
Philips never went bust, Blackberry is still around, Nokia is still around.

True .... I was thinking more of Kodak, Polaroid, Commodore Computers.


« Reply #17 on: March 16, 2014, 10:15 »
+2
I'm a Nikon snob also.

I do video and photography and I stopped buying Canon after purchasing the awful Canon XL1 back in the day. It was a terrible camera. The Panasonic HDX follow-up was 100X better. I see a lot of Canon DSLRs out there, but I consider it a consumer camera. Pros use NIKON  :P. Nah, I'm sure the Canon DSLRs can hold their own, I've just always used Nikon for photography...I think it is hard to switch once you invested ion lenses and accessories.

« Reply #18 on: March 16, 2014, 10:32 »
+3
Canon vs. Nikon is simply boring - both have made great lenses and cams. I doesn't matter, what particulary brand you use- it makes you not to a good photographer.  But both systems make it easier to reach good results. I prefer Nikon for my own photography since 1990. But in my job I use Canon, and the reason for it is simply one feature: In the old analog days, the Canon cameras turned the fim back in the cartridge after each shot (other cameras turned it out) Therefore, the already-exposed photographs were safe when the body should opened accidentally.

« Reply #19 on: March 16, 2014, 10:34 »
0
Sorry, double posting 8)

Uncle Pete

« Reply #20 on: March 16, 2014, 11:25 »
+1
Philips never went bust, Blackberry is still around, Nokia is still around.

True .... I was thinking more of Kodak, Polaroid, Commodore Computers.

Ah, Kodak and Polaroid Corp. are still in business? (On June 19, 2009, The new holding corporation for Polaroid, PLR IP Holdings, LLC announced an exclusive 5-year agreement with Summit Global Group to produce and distribute Polaroid branded digital still cameras, digital video cameras, digital photo frames and PoGo branded mobile products.)

Alive in name only for the most part.

Bell and Howell, Emerson, Victrola, Amiga, Fotomat, Pan Am, and not so tech Chiclets gum.  :) Many old names are now owned by Korean or Chinese manufacturers so they can market based on the old historic company reputations.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #21 on: March 16, 2014, 11:43 »
0
Philips never went bust, Blackberry is still around, Nokia is still around.

True .... I was thinking more of Kodak, Polaroid, Commodore Computers.

....and Minola, Agfa, Konica,Contax, Yashica and many more didn't survive.

« Reply #22 on: March 16, 2014, 11:47 »
0
I did not mean to start Canon vs Nikon flame war. Both might have problems if they cling too much to DSLR market. Yes, medium format cameras did not got away but it is very niche product now. Definitely Samsung and Apple sell more photographing devices than Hasselblad :-) I was always wondering why Canon is not trying to sell their sensors to phone manufacturers?

Rinderart

« Reply #23 on: March 16, 2014, 11:58 »
0
If Nikon Put a Phone function In My D800. it would be perfect...LOL

« Reply #24 on: March 16, 2014, 12:11 »
0
in my job I use Canon, and the reason for it is simply one feature: In the old analog days, the Canon cameras turned the fim back in the cartridge after each shot (other cameras turned it out) Therefore, the already-exposed photographs were safe when the body should opened accidentally.

I don't see how that can be right. Towards the end of a roll it would have to rewind 30 frames and then wind them back on when you pressed the the shutter for the next one. My Canon 1v certainly doesn't work like that.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
3045 Views
Last post July 11, 2010, 17:15
by Alatriste
4 Replies
4593 Views
Last post May 19, 2011, 07:31
by digitalexpressionimages
Golden Ratio

Started by WarrenPrice « 1 2  All » General Photography Discussion

28 Replies
8716 Views
Last post September 21, 2011, 03:00
by rubyroo
59 Replies
9669 Views
Last post August 31, 2013, 20:02
by shudderstok
85 Replies
11324 Views
Last post September 17, 2017, 04:36
by Milleflore

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors